PMs CENSORED ?

[glbirch]

I don't. You were the one to bring up the subject of people not being able to express themselves in English. I just pointed out to you that if you were going to put someone down for it then you had better make sure that yours is correct first.
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. And that go's for me as well I do not profess to be guru of anything let alone English, but by the same token I do not ( usually ) put people down when I see bad grammar or misspelled words as long as I understand what they are saying, thats all that counts in my book.
By the way I think we are a little of topic with this, also I don't want to get into a p****ng contest over English usage Truce

Yes, it's a little off-topic but:

And if you want to correct people on there English then use upper case E for English and youself is spelled yourself.
Thanks for the input.
David.

You brought up the topic by correcting nauidiver2004. I was just making the same point to you that you just stated. In general I leave grammer and spelling alone around here, as a) I could spend my whole day annoying people by correcting them and b) my grammer ain't perfect either.

Back to our regularily scheduled program?

 

[MSilvia]

Actually, here in the US where I *think* the board is physically housed, it's not a matter of opinion. Obcenity is not protected under freedom of speech.

Obscenity is not protected, but what is obscene is open to interpretation. It is often not the words themselves, but the context the words are put in that marks them as obscene. Filtering by word, IMHO, is of questionable worth to begin with, as it may not allow me to mention my friend **** (Richard), but won't have a problem with euphemisms that aren't dependant upon four-letter vulgarities.

Prior restraint as a means of combatting obscenity has been rejected, but as has already been said, in a private forum you can set any rules you like. Personally, I prefer leaving it uncensored, and dealing with troublemakers instead of restricting the membership at large.

On the other hand though, I don't really give a ****.

 

[cdiver2]

I think we have a communication breakdown. Your question as to why, as you state, was answered. It's a function of the board software that if certain words are excluded, they are excluded everywhere.

I did not mean to imply that you did not have a right to ask. I was following a different line of discussion.

James

As someone stated a long time ago on the bord the written word can be taken the wrong way sometimes no matter how hard we try

 

[MikeFerrara]

Obscenity is not protected, but what is obscene is open to interpretation. It is often not the words themselves, but the context the words are put in that marks them as obscene. Filtering by word, IMHO, is of questionable worth to begin with, as it may not allow me to mention my friend **** (Richard), but won't have a problem with euphemisms that aren't dependant upon four-letter vulgarities.

Prior restraint as a means of combatting obscenity has been rejected, but as has already been said, in a private forum you can set any rules you like. Personally, I prefer leaving it uncensored, and dealing with troublemakers instead of restricting the membership at large.

On the other hand though, I don't really give a ****.

I tend to agree except that a word filter is just an honest attmpt to limit what young or otherwise sensitive eyes have to see given that we are unable to read and check every single post on the board.

 

[cobaltbabe]

I tend to agree except that a word filter is just an honest attmpt to limit what young or otherwise sensitive eyes have to see given that we are unable to read and check every single post on the board.

If a child is on a board that is geared towards adult conversation then the parents of said child should be monitoring their activities. If they are on a forum that is geared towards sports, which this one is, then the environment of the board should be such that the parents feel comfortable allowing the child to view it. Now with that said, and no offense to the DIR dudes, sometimes our technical brothers and sisters can get a little stirred up. I have been known to do that myself.

For the most part I think that most of the members on this board a good. IMO

 

[HammerNoMore]

Obscenity is not protected, but what is obscene is open to interpretation. It is often not the words themselves, but the context the words are put in that marks them as obscene. Filtering by word, IMHO, is of questionable worth to begin with, as it may not allow me to mention my friend **** (Richard), but won't have a problem with euphemisms that aren't dependant upon four-letter vulgarities.

And it might filter

***** (female dog)
*** (donkey)
**** (purgatory)
etc.

But these are technical issues. No system is perfect, never will be. The fact is that the owners of this board wish to make it a place where 13 years olds can converse without being offended or booted off because of their parents or NetNanny. It's not a violation of anyone's rights but an attemp to curb language that is inapporpriate for this forum. If you have to call your buddy Rich that's either somthing you can accept as an unfortunate, but neccissary step or not.

Prior restraint as a means of combatting obscenity has been rejected.

Because it is not followed. I can do a quick search and show you many cases where people have combined words or done tricks like replacing 's' with '$' to get by the filter. Some people just won't restrain themselves. Again it's unforunate, but reality.

Personally, I prefer leaving it uncensored, and dealing with troublemakers instead of restricting the membership at large.

This is a personal observation but from what I've seen "dealing with troublmakers" causes a much bigger outlash than the word filter does.

On the other hand though, I don't really give a ****.

Good, neither do I .

James

 

[Windwalker]

People can be offended by anything. There is (thankfully) no law that says you have the right to NOT be offended. To this end, a great number of people go to great lengths to prevent people being offended. In computers, some filters block the word "Breast" as having sexual connotation. That means one cannot look up "Breast Cancer" or "Chicken Breast,” which means that the Safeway website would be considered an offending site and thus be banned from young eyes. Another correct use of words that many people find offensive is "I am a B@stard child" and "I am looking to bred my Husky, and I am looking for a B!tch" In all these context, the word is not vulgar and is used correctly, however it will be blocked by the "Filters" so I chose to alter them. There are many other ways to offend people. For example, word meaning changes can cause problems. In the 1890's my grand father was very gay. Now that meant happy, now it means "Homosexual." If I tell someone in today’s world that they look Gay, they are going to immediately think the latter. Word misunderstanding is another way to offend people. How about the gentleman who lost his job for using the word "Niggardly" in a open letter to the employees, requesting them to be thrift wise. Someone thought that it was based off the term n!gger, which was derived from the Latin word for Black, and he was reprimanded. I work for a multinational company, I have to be aware of the little idiosyncrasies that me as an American has, when dealing with my Chinese, Russian, and Indian counterparts. I grew up being aware that what might be normal for one person might not be for another. In an international board such as this, people need to learn to not be offended by every little smagging thing that someone says and does. It might not have been meant to be harmful. Also, I do not agree that the children should be "Protected" from everything. I grew up around the military, at the age of 7 I knew how to identify bombs, and what to do if one went off. I sat in military barracks listening to a dozen drunken soldier’s talk about whom they did and how many times. It doesn't matter. Sooner or later kids will grow up, and the sooner they know how hard the world can be, the better prepared they will be to deal with it. Now, I KNOW that I will have offended a bunch of people with this letter. There are two ways I can handle you, apologize or say “Tough Deal with it!” No one has the right to not be offended.

 

[cdiver2]

Yes, it's a little off-topic but:


You brought up the topic by correcting nauidiver2004. I was just making the same point to you that you just stated. In general I leave grammer and spelling alone around here, as a) I could spend my whole day annoying people by correcting them and b) my grammer ain't perfect either.

Back to our regularily scheduled program?

We could probably go on for the rest of our lives correcting each other. This gave me a idea, see new thread/poll grammar/ spelling on the board.
All the best honest
David

 

[TCDiver1]

Filtering by word, IMHO, is of questionable worth to begin with, as it may not allow me to mention my friend **** (Richard), but won't have a problem with euphemisms that aren't dependant upon four-letter vulgarities.

On the other hand though, I don't really give a ****.

Yeah, but i think it meets the objective of picking off all the popular biggies. A popular George Carlin sketch comes to mind on this one.

It stops those of us who are prone to construction mouth from swearing like drunken sailors on leave. Good for the kiddies on-board, not so good for some of the older kids on-board. No system will ever be perfect.

 

[glbirch]

We could probably go on for the rest of our lives correcting each other. This gave me a idea, see new thread/poll grammar/ spelling on the board.
All the best honest
David

Just beware of the language police...